I agree this makes the most sense. In fact, I would argue that the gen2 bump in AER was really to appease owners’ desires more than a necessity. The Volt already does what it is designed to do – electric local / hybrid long distance – better than any of its direct competitors. Cost reduction should be the #1 priority now.

I also wouldn’t be surprised to see more options appear (for a price) to compete with ever more gadget-rich cars.

They were also lobbying CARB to weaken BEVx to allow 50+ mile “EREV”s.

But really, the bump to 50 miles does in fact make a good amount of difference since it not only converts another chunk of trips to fully electric on average by distance , but in reality because it means that what was the average, is now the range in bad weather.

It’s also worth noting that the people with most to gain from EV are those who drive more miles, so it makes sense to increase the range to increase appeal.

If we had a Gen 2 Volt instead of a Gen 1 there would be more weeks per year when it wouldn’t run the engine: a regular trip my wife makes during the week, and a regular trip we make at weekends.

But, the plan is to replace our other car in the next year or two with a long-range BEV so that the Gen 1 Volt mostly be an electric* commuter.

If BEVx exists at all it’s hard to see why the Volt wouldn’t get any credit of that sort. It is very unlikely there is an appreciable difference between percentage of travel on battery in a Volt and a i3 (22Ah) if both customers are plugging theirs in.

Personally I’d rather see BEVx go away. ZEV credits should be for ZEVs, not “pretty much” ZEVs.

This has gotten really old. People don’t get Volts so they can burn gas. There are much cheaper options for that. I’ve put exactly 4 fill-ups of gas in my Gen I Volt (average 8 gallons each) in the last 16 months. All for road trips that would be impossible in any affordable BEV.

Yes. Companies do buy PHEVs for employees with no intent of plugging them in because they get tax benefits. Didn’t David Murray just two weeks ago explain that the Volt he bought used was bought by someone before him who bought it with no intent to plug it in and didn’t plug it in?

I can tell you for sure that people around my area do buy PHEVs (including the Volt) with the intent of getting a carpool sticker and no care for plugging it in.

Oh yeah. And I just saw an ad for the Pacifica E Hybrid. The ad does not mention that the car is a plug-in at all. It’s just called a hybrid. They mention the gas range first, then the electric range and then never say you plug in to get the electric range. And they don’t show a plug either in the commercial.

“…I would argue that the gen2 bump in AER was really to appease owners’ desires more than a necessity.”

That’s only true to the extent that the Volt competes against other PHEVs. If the Volt is to compete against gasmobiles, as well as BEVs, then more electric range is definitely better.

Larger battery packs have advantages beyond just added range. Larger packs can charge faster (in terms of miles added per minute) and should last longer before losing significant range as the car ages.

I agree, 100 mile range would be the perfect Volt, and maybe the perfect car period. I’ve had my 17 Volt for 14 months now and burned 1 tank of gas, only because it was going to force me to burn it after 1 year. I only added 1.5 gallons so I did waste the gas next year. I drive 30 miles a day and charge it every other day. What a car, plus if I “wanted” to do a road trip I don’t have to plan out my drive to where chargers are located. I just drive.

He’s not expecting them take up more space, but to use increases in energy density to price small bumps in capacity and range.

I disagree since I think that price reductions are more important at this point. I think that for now they’d only increase range if cost decreases available through increased energy density needed additional capacity because of power density reduction.

If the goal was to actually increase sales, then I agree the best strategy would be to reduce price rather than continue to increase range. GM already bumped up the range quite a bit from the first model year Volt, and so far as I know, sales haven’t increased much until this year, when the Bolt EV attracted more plug-in EV buyers to Chevrolet, and many were diverted (willingly or otherwise) to the Volt.

However, I think it’s pretty clear that increasing sales beyond what GM needs for its ZEV credits is not GM’s goal. As a recent rather well-informed analysis pointed out, the ZEV credits earned by the number of Bolt EVs that GM says it plans to make (30,000 per year) is a pretty close match to the number of additional ZEV credits it needs beyond what it’s already earning.

Furthermore, as has been said many times, it’s very likely — I’d say almost certain — that the reason GM isn’t selling a larger class of PHEV cars (or SUVs, or pickups) with a Voltec-based drivetrain is because GM has no intention of cutting into sales of its more profitable gasmobiles. And GM’s actual customers — that is, the dealerships — don’t like them either.

Totally agree…There are some “EV range cheerleaders” who were hoping for more range by reducing the buffer…I’d be a bigger fan of lobbing off a few kWh to reduce cost and weight keeping the same 53 miles of range if they’re going to increase the buffer…

I would expect that since Chevy will hit the barriers on the tax credits next year that the 2019 model will actually decrease in range. So for instance if they make a tweak to improve the battery 5-10% but reduce range to 30 miles, their batter cost would go way down and the weight of the vehicle would fall. They might be able to shave $2000 off the price of the vehicle and the gas mileage while on gas would go up. This is where Prius Prime is positioning itself. Presumably a higher capacity battery would be an option.

Battery prices have dropped so much since 2010 that you don’t get much of a prive reduction by reducing pack size.
A 10% price reduction would get the msrp close to $30k which would remedy a big problem for the Volt. People really DO NOT expect a smaller Chevy car to cost more than $30k.

I own one an I agree. We have an i3 and a Volt and between those 2 we never need to use gas except when we go out of town every now and then.

I rarely go beyond 53 miles a day and when I do there usually is some time in the garage or with an outside charger that gives me just enough charge to not need to use gas.

GM would be smart to focus on getting the cost down for when the tax credits expire and begin phasing out for them sometime in late 2018. They essentially need to get the cost down by at least $7,500.

If they can get the base MSRP down to $26,500 including destination absent the tax credit I think more people will be interested. I would bet the psychological impact of seeing $34,000 on the sticker even if there is a tax credit scares quite a few people away.

GM should offer a hatchback Volt model, like it does with the Cruise. (Regular Volt is a liftback and also technically a hatchback). It would be a good choice for those who want a Bolt hatchback, but aren’t ready to commit to a BEV as their only car.

When I compare to Volt pics, there appears to be a higher roof on the Cruze hatchback directly over the back of the rear doors. That would indicate more headroom in the back seat if the doors are the same size (good assumption).

I believe the current Cruze “liftback” based Volt should never have been created and they should of made the Volt based on the Cruze hatchback to begin with…

The issue with rear head room and the Volt is they cleverly have you sitting under the hatch glass, so you only have a 1/4″-ish between you and the exterior…The Cruze hatchback will have thicker metal roof with reinforcements and the headliner…

To Sven, the Volt and Cruze are both based on the D2XX platform, so Volt could’ve been given Cruze’s larger back seat and more generous headroom.

Thing is – this would cut into Cruze sales. This is why they gave Volt v.2 a “4 door coupe” design with sloping roof and slightly shorter wheelbase. We know they can claim it was purely for aerodynamic/range advantage, but there’s more to GM’s clever decision making than that.

Automakers do not want to crimp their high-margin ICE sales by offering an electrified model that is more compelling.

Both the Cruze sedan and Cruze hatchback receive the same mpg rating of 30/40…The rear doesn’t make a huge difference in aero, they could elongate it and there wouldn’t be a huge difference…

It really just boils down to logic, the point of having the nearly 350 miles of ICE range means it’s for folks who wanted a roadtrips and could most likely utilize the extra room…If the plan was more of an i3 REX, they could have gave the thing a 1.5 fuel tank and received more ZEV credits thus in theory offer it at a lower price…

Also, much to the disappointment of Trump, the hatchback is built in Mexico…

As all the plugin discussions center about range, and CARB having hard range limits to qualify for credits, I doubt you need conspiracy theories to explain GM decision to use sedan instead of hatchback for Volt. Ideally they should offer 2 versions now just like for Cruze. Or more. But maybe sales numbers are not that great to justify second investment.

Stated once again (today, probably again tomorrow), trips over ~50 miles comprise fewer than 5% of the number of trips driven in the average US vehicle. Until there is significant & affordable autonomous service availability and/or MUCH greater penetration of car sharing in US markets, the Volt remains the best choice in this size of car for single-car EV enthusiasts. In general the Volt user can look forward to engine operation only for “maintenance” runs (a few minutes every six weeks, using about 125ml of fuel), cold (under 15degF) operation, or occasional long trips. AEM will be over 75%.

I don’t think the Volt needs more range, it’s plenty already. For a hybrid 53 miles is really good.

I am curious what changes if any the next Bolt will get. I hope GM is smart enough to listen to their customers. People have mostly complained about the seats and the plastic dash. I’m not sure if they can do much about the dash without significantly changing the production line but I’m sure they could improve the seats. On top of that I’d like to see a 100 kW fast charger as standard.

One welcome change for MY18 would be adaptive cruise. All the cool cars are getting it as at least an option. The lack of an ACC option is what has me seriously debating between a new e-Golf or Ioniq instead of a Bolt.

The 2017 DOES have ACC. I have it on mine. I don’t really care for it, even though I waited to buy the car until I found one that had it. The reason I don’t care for it is in traffic it accelerates at maximum speed when the gap increases then slows down rapidly when it catches up. Do that a few times and you disengage the cruise. If it was programmed to “slowly” accelerate it may be more easy to deal with, but the constant flooring and braking is a bit much. No traffic, no problems with the cruise.

I agree with most here that the range is good enough. Granted, I wouldn’t complain if it got more, but it is so rare that I use the gas engine as it is I have no real excuse.

What I’d RATHER see is some performance upgrades. If they want to get me to trade in my 2017 then they need to add a motor to the rear and give me a sport mode where the ICE will stay running for a launch mode so I could take it to the drag strip and actually turn some heads.

I think the Volt is a rock-solid offering as it is. It really has no match in its category. I would MUCH rather see Chevrolet expand the Voltec EREV formula to larger cars. And I specifically mean the EREV, not like the Malibu Hybrid. But actually build that EREV Equinox they teased oh so many years ago. Now that would be a hot seller.

The CT6 is already out. And the results on it indicate to me that they should probably work on the system some more before putting it in the Equinox. It loses its “all electric until the battery is flat” functionality in the CT6 with the current system.

Nice to know AT LEAST SOMEONE is advertising
Volt. It may be different in California…GM surely isn’t advertising it anywhere else.

Dealers have stock – they have to move it. No wonder Volts ( or Bolt EVs ) aren’t flying off the shelves. Lots of folks don’t know it exists, and many think it’s an inferior Prius for $40,000!

Even Chevy dealers advertise Volt as “42 MPG” and “automatic transmission”, or “CVT”. I mean – it’s sad. Go to Autotrader.com, Edmunds, Kelly Blue Book or anywhere else car dealers advertise, punch in Volt and look up the 43 MPG nonsense. Who knew Volt owners get over 100 MPGe and often are 90%+ electric and getting over 700MPG!

There is this tax refund thing. 200,000 cars and it’s up. Bolt EV needs to sell around 25,000-30,000 units/year so why make the $7500 bennie go away by advertising the Volt – or informing the public how it works?!

It’s so sad to watch. While LEAFs are abundant in my area, the sighting of one v.2 Volt ( I live next to a major highway with over 200,000 cars going by per day ) is rare.

So we’ll see the many more Chevy ads on TV – even the ones mentioning “Green Car Of The Year” awards – NOT SHOWING Volt! – Or even Bolt EV.

I saw a 15 second TV ad on a major cable channel the other day for Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid. Chrysler has about 199,562 more low/zero emissions vehicles to sell before it’s tax refund deal runs out!

As a couple people mentioned already, GM needs to focus like a laser on improving reliability on the Volt. If they don’t hit industry average reliability as measured by Consumer Reports, they will struggle to convert Prius owners, who are the biggest segment of auto owners who are likely to buy a plug-in in the next few years.

Along with that, as others said, focus on price reduction and add a hatchback option to address the rear-seat headroom and low cargo space issues. These will further attract the utilitarian Prius-owner segment.

If GM does these things and cranks up volume they could take the Volt sales up quite a long way, IMO.

“No one ever sits in the rear seats and the only thing i put in my Volt is my backpack or lunchbag.”

If he meant “No one ever sits in *MY* rear seats…” then fair enough. But he seemed to be making a more general statement that rear seat headroom doesn’t matter.

People sit in the backseat of our volt at least once a week. 😛 The space is not huge. It is perfectly fine for most adults, but people like my 6’4″ cousin do not fit comfortably.

I think that DJ’s point was: do not to make blanketed statements about your own use and assume they apply to everyone. Although Volt’s post was in no way the dumbest thing I had read all day. Not even close LOL.

I won’t buy a Volt until GM gets rid of the ICE. I’m Ok with a range extender using hydrocarbon fuels in a chemical reactor instead of ICE.

Two examples:

PowerCell Sweden AB has developed a modular system of fuel cell platforms producing electricity from hydrogen with only heat and water as emissions. The fuel cells are designed to handle pure hydrogen as well as the hydrogen reformed from e.g. biogas, natural gas, biodiesel or standard low-sulphur diesel.

Nissan Motors revealed the world’s first Solid Oxide Fuel-Cell (SOFC)-powered prototype vehicle in Brazil that runs on bio-ethanol electric power. The e-Bio Fuel-Cell prototype vehicle runs on 100-percent ethanol to charge a 24kWh battery that enables a cruising range of more than 600km.

You gave two examples of things that don’t really exist. The Volt exists. There’s a big difference here. when you make a product you have to work with what is practical. When you are just making big talk you can give fanciful claims.

You might as well be saying you want a dark-energy reactor or something ridiculous. And if you are out of battery power and you are wanting to run on hydrocarbons for a range extender, what difference does it really make whether it is chemical or mechanical? The result is the same. Sort of like those people that were upset that the Volt’s engine can drive the wheels, like that is somehow important?

It is obvious that tailpipe emissions are not the same. Maybe it is the same for people in the middle of nowhere, but electric cars are more often used in densely populated areas where air quality is critical issue.
Lack of vibrations and noise is also significant difference.

SOFC tech is interesting, altho from what I’ve read, the tech is difficult to implement, and certainly more complex and more expensive than a hydrogen-powered FCEV. I guess that’s why so far it’s only appeared in prototype vehicles.

Still, I’d love to see development of fuel cell vehicles which use a fuel more practical than compressed hydrogen, thus potentially separating FCEVs from Big Oil’s promotion of the “hydrogen economy” hoax.

The Volt’s lack of features/options continues to disappoint most everyone who’s not already an diehard owner…

The following were not mentioned so I’ll set my expectations high that the 2018 Volt will gain:
7.2KW charging…
Selectable temps for ERDTT (Class action in Canada over this)…
Quicker 0-60 via running both the EV motor and ICE Engine like the ELR in sports mode…
60 miles of range from reducing the buffer…
55mpg to compete with the better selling Prime…
$29,995 MSRP…
Selectable setting to turn on and off autoplay…
Redesigned “dead pedal”…
Auto up all four windows…

If this doesn’t happen, wouldn’t be the first time the Volt disappoints someone…

I find it bizarre you insist that the Volt absolutely must have gas-free operation below 15F and also the ability to burn up both gas and electricity at once for better performance. What is your goal here?

That would make it very hard on GM to try to qualify (test) the car. They would have to test it in a wider range of settings and situations to ensure it works well. I can see why GM doesn’t wouldn’t want to have custom temps.

Personally, 15F seems like a reasonable cutoff. If they want to go lower on no gas they’ll just have to get an EV I think. On another note, there is a big discussion about this kind of thing on the Prius Prime here:

Apparently elektrek couldn’t get their car to stay in ICE mode even in decent weather. They complained to Toyota who said they’d send another car. They didn’t wait but just test drove a Prius Prime at a local dealer and had the same issue. I can’t tell what is up.

I believe most agree with this, I’m sure there’s a group of Volt owners to hoping more range will improve sales yet the it’s already getting beat by the Prime…

I personally would strongly recommend they make C1/C2 standard on all models to compete with the Prime and Honda models…It’s inevitable GM will be doing that anyways, just hope it’s during the Volts (& Bolts) lifecycle…

I have to disagree on the faster charging. It would cost minimally more to bump the charging up to 6.6, or even 7.2. There are definitely days when I can’t fully charge because of mid-day trips but if I had 6.6 it would all but take care of those.

Not to mention TOU rates that usually start at Noon. Take the kids to school, and get back home and you’ve got 3 hours to charge at most before ridiculous rates kick in. Not enough time to fully charge yet with 6.6 it would be.

Again though not everyone would care about it but I think a lot of people would be able to get more EV miles out of their Volt if it had that.

The issue is not how small the cost increase would be. The issue is that it would cost MORE instead of LESS, which means that faster charging is the opposite of the direction the price needs to be going.

No leather steering wheel anymore. That sounds really good. Hopefully nothing else contains of leather in the base version. So you can actually buy a relatively eco-friendly car without supporting the cruel animal skin industry. Probs to that GM. I hope you had that in mind when you dropped the leather steering wheel.

If the urethane steering wheel in the Bolt is any indication of what you will get in the updated standard Volt, that is the most awful feeling steering wheel I have ever laid my hands on. Very cheap and should not be ordered by anyone.

The 2018 Volt is technically not the second year car. This is because the 2016 was only rolled out in 11 states.

Hopefully, if GM follows the pattern of Volt v.1 they will add some plush to the hard plastic bits inside the car – make the blue interior lighting standard on the Premium trim. Also add the brandy/jet black option BACK to the Kinetic blue color – something they removed between ’16 and ’17 models. The brandy dashboard does reflect rather badly on the windshield on sunny days – something that can be corrected by having a black area on the top of the dash. I really like the two-tone effect, but it’s no longer available on the exterior color I want.

Other changes I’d like to see – turn signals back in the side mirrors, like Bolt EV and v.1 Volt. Also, the option to add the Bolt’s video rear view mirror in Volt – it would make a big difference in a car that is hard to see out the back.

Finally – a BIG wish is to do something about the ugly grille filler in the Premium Volt with ACC. Nobody talks about this but it is butt-ugly. Instead of the shiny silver plastic with a chrome plastic and gold Chevy logo in the middle, the ACC equipped Volts have dull grey grille filler pieces and a molded-in larger Chevy logo. This is to accomodate the ACC naturlly, but does it have to be SO UGLY?! My suggestion is to give Volt a Bolt EV grille treatment, charcoal with the nice accents.

These changes are easy – but for maybe the mirror turn signals…And most the parts are already in the parts bin. Hopefully the 2019 Volt ( the true 2nd year ) will show some nice changes and not just trim and colors.

I believe the grills will change, they’ll be dark gray or black for FY19 like the Bolt…Oddly the Cruze does offer LED side mirrors but they were intentionally left out of the Volt…Will require an all new wiring harness, but so would added LED accents and the “display mirror” so perhaps there’s a slight chance there will get more powered optioned…

I expect the wing mirror signals were left out because the Volt v2 is a North America car only. In Europe you must have turn signal repeaters on the fenders or wing mirrors. Not so in the US market. Bolt and Volt v1 are world-wide cars, so they had them.

Well – it’s both that it isn’t sold in Europe as an Ampera any longer — and cost. The whole recipe for Volt and Bolt EV is to try to trim the costs and try to make some margin on the cars. They can afford to embellish an ICE model with a bit of padding here ( like how Volt’s back seat passengers swim in a sea of hard plastic ), and a wing mirror turn signal, puddle lights or power retracting mirror there.

We know it’s about paying for that big battery pack – so to me, at least, I’m willing to ignore some of these omissions.

If and when EVs and PHEVs begin to sell to a more mainstream audience, surely the little embellishments will find their way back in.

For now, it’s a Bolt EV that is one fantastic machine, and a great car – albeit with hard plastic interior and no ACC. The thin seats could use a tiny bit more padding and bolstering, but I know how heavy seats are – especially ones laden with power motors and heavy frames. To those who complain about the thin seats – maybe in time we can add more meshing and tech to make them as comfortable as those big La-Z-Boys we’ve become accustomed to in our gas burners – but I can live with the Bolt EV or i3’s thin seats.

I’d rather keep the battery pack as it is if adding kwhs means lessening the buffers. To me, the overbuilt nature of Volt’s battery pack is a huge selling point. I want it to last as I keep my vehicles a long time.

An air-cooled LEAF is a lease-mobile unless they thermally control the pack.

There is some concern that Bolt EVs and Volts will see reduced battery size and AER once the tax credit is over.

I maintain that LEAFs, Bolt EVs and Bolts would be prime candidates for battery size options. A budget LEAF having, say a 100 mile budget version, a 150 and 230 mile version upmarket. Bolt EV could come in optional battery sizes for reduced cost. Why not? Just the same as many ICE models come in I-4 or V-6 versions.

Have you noticed Toyota put out the Prius in the most boring, bland colors possible for the first few years?

I mean, the red was a dark wine red that looked pretty dim, especially when not washed every week. There was a dull gold, an unenthusiastic light blue metallic, silver, white and grey. I shant forget the horrible pee green ones!

Volt wasn’t much better. The colors offered
included a silver with a hint of green they ran a contest to name. Veridian Joule won. First time I saw one – I couldn’t tell the difference between it and the silver. GM added a dull brown and a dirt brown interior later in the model cycle. The blue didn’t pop, it was a dark affair. It too was almost as bleak as Toyota’s color spectrum.

Prius colors got slightly better later on. The v.1 Volt finally got a nice dark grey called Ashen gray that replaced the generic Cyber gray. V.2 Volt got Kinetic Blue which popped. They took the gold out of the pearl white and it’s snazzy too. Citron green was a throwback to the UGH “eco” colors.

You see – they think “green” people hug trees and wear Birkenstocks. We would be offended if we stood out, or were flashy. God forbid.